Absolutely you can do that and no problem. What you need to do is make sure the antennas are in the fiberglass section of the fuselage and not touching other wires. It's normally pretty crowded in the nose of a sailplane and so keeping other wires away is sometimes a chore.

Also, if you want to see some installations and experiments we have conducted using 2.4 technology, check out the 2-Point-4 Chronicles at this website:

The 2-Point-4 Chronicles documents the things we have done to prove how good 2.4 works, plus dispell myths and hearsay about what works and what doesn't. We found that things that were supposed to be disaster were absolutely fine, while things that were said to be solid really were not. The Chronicles is yours for free, no fees, no commercials or ads, not even your email address. Just down load and enjoy. You will see photo of installations just like you describe, without whiskers hanging out. Check it out and you will help the Chronicles become an international document.

The 2-Point-4 Chronicles documents the things we have done to prove how good 2.4 works, plus dispell myths and hearsay about what works and what doesn't. We found that things that were supposed to be disaster were absolutely fine, while things that were said to be solid really were not. The Chronicles is yours for free, no fees, no commercials or ads, not even your email address. Just down load and enjoy. You will see photo of installations just like you describe, without whiskers hanging out. Check it out and you will help the Chronicles become an international document...

Awesome work and document! You should publish it as a separate web page!

I would have to agree with Lenny and efowlerpreston on this. Mostly because the actual amount of CF in the strips is not uniform nor in the same position from one plane to the next. So, it is better to error on the side of being safe with the whiskers, than to risk the possible loss of the model due to CF blocking. The whiskers might not look good and might cause drag, but crashing a plane due to a loss of signal truly sucks.

(Did ya ever notice how a modern fighter looks clean and aerodynamic when it's in prototype, and then by the time it becomes operational, it has junk popping out all over the place? Go figure)

orion with 2.4

I have one of the Orions that Lenny built, it has the carbon strips longitudinally in the fuse from the factory. Bought it used, I couldn't my remote rx antennas back through the holes he drilled and so I just have it inside the fuse. I have not had any problems, but this is just results based. Simple range checks indicated no problems so I flew it. Probably crazy but it has worked, I've had the thing absolutely specked out many, many times, and flown it low many times as well. I'd like to know if the new carbon fuse rx's are allowing for complete worry free, hole free installs?

The carbon fuselage rx's are really no different in use than the other receivers, save for the longer antennas. This is to allow the antenna to exit the fuselage in a convenient location that won't expose the wire to damage from landing, being handled, etc. You still have to poke the last 32-mm of antenna outside. In producing the 2-Point-4 Chronicles, we did not find a single rx that claimed to be carbon compatible and could pass a range check with the antenna inside the carbon fuselage. Virtually all of them happily passed range check when the antenna was exposed ala whisker.

While it is true that a majority of the text within the Chronicles was written prior to 2010, you might notice on my website that I write updates every 6-months or so, as new products come on to the scene. And then I add that update stuff to main article at least every 15 months. But , just in case you may have missed that, I have done testing on newer receivers made for the carbon fiber fuselages. In particular, the AR9300, AR9310, AR600, and AR6255 units. In my testing and usage, (and YMMV), the last 32-mm of antenna still needed to be outside for best performance. I thought the same as you when these receivers first appearred...oh cool! No more whiskers! Sorry, but that was not the case. They simply made the antenna lead longer so that you could poke the tips out somewhere in a place that the antenna was outside but not prone to being disturbed by your hand, landing on the wire, or anything else that might break the wire. I still don't know why the manufacturers still use the rather brittle antenna wire, other than the fact that finding a super-flexible, shielded wire is mission: "impossible".

Now, if you decide to place one of the new carbon friendly receivers into a carbon fuselage and it works as advertised, please let us know. And don't forget that we need to see the model, the receiver, and what testing or procedures you performed to make it work....you might be on to something we can all use! (And if it doesn't work, let us know, too!)